High Court
Case Details
Court No. - 69 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 13734 of 2022 Applicant :- Bablu Yadav Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Shyamal Kumar Prayagi Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Mohd. Faiz Alam Khan,J.
Legal Reasoning
Shri Vinay Kumar Mishra, Advocate has filed his 'vakalatnama' on behalf of the informant, which is taken on record. Heard Shri S.C. Srivastava and Shri Satendra Kumar Mishra, learned counsels for the accused-applicant, Shri Vinay Kumar Mishra, learned counsel representing the informant as well as learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record. This bail application has been moved by the accused/applicant- Bablu Yadav for grant of bail, in Case Crime No. 50 of 2021, under Sections 147, 148, 149, 302, 352, 323, 504, 506, 188, 269 I.P.C. and Section 51(a) of Disaster Management Act, 2005, Police Station Bhaluani, District Deoria, during trial. Learned counsel for the accused-applicant while pressing the bail application submits that the applicant has been falsely implicated in this case and he has not committed any offence as claimed by the prosecution. It is further submitted that the case of the prosecution as is evident from the first information report is to the tune that on 04.05.2021 at about 9 am. accused persons named in the first information report including the instant applicant Bablu on the basis of prior enmity armed with lathi, danda, knife, country made pistol and stones started assaulting the informant's party. Manoj Shahi, Arun Shahi and Utkarsh were possessing knife while other accused persons were assaulting with lathi, danda and stones. In the incident Bharat Kunvar (father of the informant) as well as Balvant Kunvar sustained grievous injuries and Bharat Kunvar had died during the course of treatment. The postmortem report of the deceased Bharat Kunvar reveals that he has sustained 06 stitched wounds on various parts of his body. Vital organs of the body were found ruptured and death of the deceased is opined to have taken place due to shock and hemorrhage, as a result of antemortem chest injury caused by sharp object as well as due to antemortem head injury. Highlighting the above facts, it is vehemently submitted on behalf of the applicant that the role of assaulting with knife has been attributed to co-accused Manoj Shahi, Arun Shahi and Utkarsh, while the role of 'stone pelting' has been assigned to the other accused persons including the instant applicant. It is further submitted that two co-accused persons namely Acchhe Lal Rajbhar and Suresh Yadav, who are standing on the identical footing as of the applicant have been granted bail by the subordinate court, vide order dated 15.12.2021 and 21.12.2021 passed by the learned Sessions Judge, Deoria in Bail Application No. 1003 of 2021 and 1236 of 2021, while the bail application of the applicant has been rejected on the basis of mentioning wrong facts that the bail application of co- accused Acchhe Lal Rajbhar has been rejected while the same had been allowed vide order dated 15.12.2021. It is next submitted that the death of the deceased has been caused due to the assault by the sharp edged weapons and it could not be ascertained at this stage as to who was the author of the injuries sustained by the other two injured persons namely Rahul and Balvant Kunvar. It is also submitted that applicant is in jail in this case since 20.09.2021 and he is not having any previous criminal history and there is no apprehension that after being released on bail he may flee from the course of law or may otherwise misuse the liberty. Learned A.G.A., however, opposes the prayer of bail of the applicant on the ground that the applicant has committed heinous offence and, therefore, he is not entitled to be released on bail, however, he could not confront the fact that the role of the instant applicant is at par with co-accused Acchhe Lal Rajbhar and Suresh Yadav, who have been granted bail by the subordinate court. Shri Vinay Kumar Mishra, learned counsel representing the informant has also opposed the prayer of bail of the applicant, but could not confront the submissions made by learned counsel for the applicant that the role of the instant applicant is at par with the role assigned to the two accused persons, who have been granted bail by the subordinate court. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and having perused the record, it is transpired from the record that the death of the deceased Bharat Kunvar has resulted due to the assault given by the sharp edged weapons. The role of carrying sharp edged weapon has been assigned to the other co-accused persons while the role of the instant applicant and the role of Acchhe Lal Rajbhar and Suresh Yadav was to the tune that they were pelting stones. Acchhe Lal Rajbhar and Suresh Yadav have been granted the facility of bail by the subordinate court. However, the subordinate court has rejected the bail application of the instant applicant on a false illusion that the bail application of accused Acche Lal Rajbhar has been rejected by the subordinate court while it was evident on record that the bail application of Acche Lal Rajbhar has been allowed vide order dated 15.12.2021 of Sessions Judge, Deoria. Applicant is in jail in this case since 20.09.2021 without any previous criminal antecedents and the presence of the applicant could be secured before the trial court by placing adequate conditions. Keeping in view the nature of the offence, evidence, complicity of the accused, severity of punishment, submissions of the learned counsel for the parties and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, I am of the considered view that applicant has made out a case for bail. The bail application is thus allowed. Let the accused/applicant- Bablu Yadav involved in above- mentioned case, be released on bail on his furnishing a personal bond with two sureties in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned subject to following conditions:- (i) The applicant shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence by intimidating/pressurizing the witnesses, during the investigation or trial. (ii) The applicant shall cooperate in the trial sincerely without seeking any adjournment. (iii) The applicant shall not indulge in any criminal activity or commission of any crime after being released on bail. In case of breach of any of the above conditions, it shall be a ground for cancellation of bail. Identity, status and residence proof of the applicant and sureties be verified by the Court concerned before the bonds are accepted. Observations made herein-above by this court are only for the purpose of disposal of this bail application and shall not be construed as an expression on the merits of the case. Order Date :- 19.4.2022/Praveen Digitally signed by PRAVEEN KUMAR Date: 2022.04.20 11:41:33 IST Reason: Location: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad